Bailey v. City of New York, et al
Filing
56
ORDER denying without prejudice 42 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. In accordance with matters discussed on the record at the conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The April 21 e-mail from Plaintiff's mother to the Court advisi ng that no counsel has been retained by Plaintiff shall be filed on the docket in this case. The attachments that discuss Plaintiff's health issues and academic records will be filed under seal. All future correspondence with the Court will be f iled on the docket in this case. Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute [ECF No. 42] is DENIED without prejudice. On or before May 12, 2021, Plaintiff shall file a letter physically and personally signed by Plaintiff advising th e Court whether Plaintiff will continue to prosecute this action pro se or whether Plaintiff is discontinuing this action and voluntarily dismissing the case. In the event Plaintiff elects to move forward with this action, the Court GRANTS Defendants leave to renew their motion for summary judgment. The briefing schedule for Defendants' motion is as follows: Defendants' motion due on or before May 27, 2021; Plaintiff's opposition due on or before June 28, 2021; Defendants' reply due on or before July 13, 2021. Failure by Plaintiff to file an opposition to Defendants' motion may result in the Court treating the record as closed and ruling on the motion as filed. The parties shall consult the Court's Individual Practice Rules and ensure compliance therewith. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate docket entry 42 and mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at the address of record. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 4/27/2021) (kv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
DAMOND BAILEY,
Plaintiff,
-against-
1:19-cv-01488-MKV
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY
POLICE DEPARTMENT, NEW YORK CITY POLICE
OFFICERS JOHN DOES NUMBERS 1-6, and NEW
YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS JANE DOES 1-6,
individually and in their official capacities,
ORDER
Defendants.
MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge:
The Court held a status conference in this matter on April 27, 2021. Plaintiff, an adult who
is proceeding pro se, appeared personally accompanied by Ms. Tiasha Jenkins, his mother.
Counsel for Defendants also appeared. Prior to the hearing, the Court received an e-mail from Ms.
Jenkins advising that she was unable to retain counsel to represent her son. [ECF No. 53.]
At the hearing, the Court explained that it would not proceed with a hearing on Plaintiff’s
competency and the appointment of Ms. Jenkins as a guardian ad litem since it would be futile
given the inability to retain counsel. The Court further explained that Plaintiff may continue to
prosecute the action pro se if he desires to do so. During the hearing, Plaintiff expressed a desire
to discontinue the action, but he and his mother expressed a desire to discuss the matter further.
In accordance with matters discussed on the record at the conference, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:
The April 21 e-mail from Plaintiff’s mother to the Court advising that no counsel
has been retained by Plaintiff shall be filed on the docket in this case. The
attachments that discuss Plaintiff’s health issues and academic records will be filed
under seal. All future correspondence with the Court will be filed on the docket in
this case.
1
Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute [ECF No. 42] is DENIED
without prejudice.
On or before May 12, 2021, Plaintiff shall file a letter physically and personally
signed by Plaintiff advising the Court whether Plaintiff will continue to prosecute
this action pro se or whether Plaintiff is discontinuing this action and voluntarily
dismissing the case.
In the event Plaintiff elects to move forward with this action, the Court GRANTS
Defendants leave to renew their motion for summary judgment. The briefing
schedule for Defendants’ motion is as follows:
o Defendants’ motion due on or before May 27, 2021;
o Plaintiff’s opposition due on or before June 28, 2021;
o Defendants’ reply due on or before July 13, 2021.
Failure by Plaintiff to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion may result in
the Court treating the record as closed and ruling on the motion as filed. The
parties shall consult the Court’s Individual Practice Rules and ensure compliance
therewith.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate docket entry 42 and mail a copy
of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at the address of record.
SO ORDERED.
_________________________________
_
______________________________
____
__ ______________
_
_
MARY KAY VYSKOCIL
Y KAY VYSKOCIL
YSK
YS
I
United States District Judge
States Dist
istrict
Date: April 27, 2021
New York, NY
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?